Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1887-09-13

Comments ON the Collectors Printed
Statement.

10 the EdltOr OF IHE EVENING STAR:
A friend has favored me with copy OF Collector
Cooks statement Of property to be sold for take
on the 27th Of this month. This statement make
volume of 345 pages. 1t bears upon its title page
the name of the firm OF DUNLAP & Clarke, Printers
and Bookbinders, Philadelphia, Pa, who executed
the work. On opening this book it mpresses one at
first sight as volume OF poems, so neatly and
artistically are the lines arranged. With, how
ever. the large number OF job printing establish
ments in this city 1t strikes one as Singular that
we should go to Philadelphia, or any other city,
to get this work done, even though 1t be done
better than our printers could execute it, which Is
doubtful.
The last lfty-nlne pages OF this book are de-s
voted TO arrearages OF Waterman taxes, amongs
which TAIL TO find one OF those for which Captain
SymOnS has been sending out notices the past three
months or assessments for mains laid by private
parties at their own expense Some OF these as
SeSSLnentS, which are commonly known and under
STOOD here as bogus assessments" are for private
mains, laid fifteen years ago. These assessments
are either due or they are not due. 1t seems to me
this is a plain proposition. II due, then they
should be in Mr.. Cooks advertisements. II not
due, then they should be stricken from the books
at the District building IL Mr.. Cooks books or
the auditors books, show that these commonly
called "bogus assessments, are due, then why has
he not put them in his list Of arrearages for water
main taxes? II neither he nor the auditor have
any account OF such taxes, then by what legal
right does Capt. Symons send out such bills?
About three months ago The STAR announced
that the water department expected to realize
over 800, 900 from these assessments. The mails
were loaded down with threatening notices for
several weeks, from which a considerable sum has
been realized. In one case the tax amounted to
over 500. The charge was made by the Water
Takers Protective Association that these assess
mentS clOuded the titles Of large amount OF real
estate, which was denied by Commissioner Wheat
ley, but the same week he made this denial gen.
tleman sold lot to prominent banker who on
searching the title, found 1t clOuded with one of
these sO-called bogus assessments" The owner
went TO the commissioners and demanded that
this "bogus tax standing against his property be
stricken from the books so that he could give
clear title, which was done. Now, If that was a
just tax by what right did the Commissioners
cancel 1t? II the tax was unjust, then why do not
the commissioners announce to the public that all
were mistaken in making such assessments? It
would be interesting to know by what sys-
extor ethics taxes class T. run
citizens, while 1t cancels the same kind of taxes
against another class OF citizens. The sum real
included in the statement Of the Commissioners rs
published in The STAR or August 81 in which 1t is
shown that the receipts for water taxes for the
nine years ending June 30 1887, were 1921 O95 a.
As the commissioners have now evidently aban-
doned any further attempt to collect these So
VertiSe them in the annual list OF tax sales, of
course all OF such taxes that have been collected
VIII mare 10 De refunded, which, to the extent of
their amount, will have TO be deducted from the
receipts given for the nine years above which will
make more unfavorable showing fol. the water
tax fund than has been stated.
In Mr.. Cooks list OF taX-Sale arrearageS there
appears some curious items. To instance there
Is Waterman tax against Ida Geier for ten sub
iots In square 1OO4 ranging from 1857 to 30 cents
for the first installmentS, which are on interest
from June 10, 1887. Square 1904 is between and
81 and 18th and 18th streets northeast. Why there
should be such q difference In these assessments
does not appear, as the lots seem to be all of a
size. suspect, however, that the most OF these
assessments are for a three-inch main in an alley
which Class or mains Capt. SymOnS stated in an
interview in The STAR are not aSsessabe 1t
would De interesting to see statement OF the In.
II IN 4
1887 Ii is doubtful II the amount realized from
them.
on the page following Mrs. Geier's assessments
Is one against susan Fitzgerald for all INSTALL
mentS against sub lot ga, IN square $50 on inter-
est since November Is, 1879, for main, amount
Ing 10 S9iO.GO When one citizen is charged over
one thousand times as much as another for a
water main, both lots being subdivided 1t would
seem 10 De about time for radical change In the
assessment OF the Waterman taxes.
But Ida Geier'S Assessments are not the smallest
IN MrCoOk list. Even as wealthy a. man as Mr. JnO
T. Leninanis to be sold out for the non-payment of
tax OF only A cents for the nrst and second in
stainents OF Waterman tax ON interest from Sep
TENDER !, 1856, on sub lot /, square $50 which Is
the nat-ir0n square bounded by L, 81 and New
lorK anu New Jersey avenues. II would seem by
this that MI. Lenman's Waterman tax for the
TOUR instruments against this lot Is but IS cents
AS according TO Capt. Symons, 1T cost 81 cents per
front iOOt 10 lay 6-inch mains for the two years
ending June 80, 1886, IL would be Interesting to
know the number OF square feet as well as front
leet In the lot that Is 10 be sold for this tax of "A
cents and interest. But Mr.. Lenman's tax is NOT
the lowest, Tor the non-payment OF which property
Is 10 De sold Mr.. Elias G.. Kearsey goes him six
cents better In the downward scale his first install
ment OF Waterman tax on interest from October
10, 1856, on sub lot +, square 33I REACHING the
enormous sum OF 80 cents. ~
have hot, by any means exhausted the suhtact
Dut think / have given enough to show thai the
moduS opcrandi or our District government for a.
oeoslns anu correcting Waterman taxes is truly
mortalS. + II S,p.Nr